4 ms·

I'll bite... your bio says you draw. Do you really think this work took no skill, or is this an attempt at sarcasm?

egypturnash 6y ago
This does not look substantially different from the stuff I was making when it was 1985 and I had a brand new copy of Deluxe Paint on my Amiga. Actually wait no I think I was actually trying to think about making something pleasant to look at instead of randomly spotting around the default colors with the airbrush. This is idle doodling, at best. Experiments with the tool being sold for a ludicrously high price, because she was in the gallery system and there were a bunch of rich idiots who might be willing to pay that. Looking around her site she does appear to have some actual skills at composition, palettes, and painting, but they are not on display here in the least.
- egonschiele 6y ago
  Interesting. I'd say picking the right colors, textures and shapes to make a group of people feel nostalgic about video games that don't exist, that takes real skill. It sounds like this art didn't do anything for you. But it did for others. This[1] didn't do anything for me either. But I sure as hell wouldn't be selfish enough to say it's not art. [1] http://egypt.urnash.com/rita/chapter/01/ http://egypt.urnash.com/rita/chapter/01/
  - fractallyte 6y ago
    So, while individual pieces are fairly simplistic (and even amateurish, to a technical artist), taken as a whole they create a context and evoke a mood -> impressionism! Is that a way to understand it?
    - egonschiele 6y ago
      Yeah, that's one way to understand it (though I wouldn't call this impressionism). At the most human level, I'd say if someone connects with it, it's art. I did connect with these pieces so was bummed to see someone insulting them -- and an artist, no less. For example, I loved these: https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga47.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga47.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga36.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga36.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga46.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga46.html But it's hard to say why ... and that's where I can start to ask why and start engaging with the work.
  - egypturnash 6y ago
    Did I say this isn’t art? No. I said it looks like someone who just got a new tool fucking around with it, and that it looks much like what everyone who just got a copy of Deluxe Paint 2 tended to create. You make some patterns, you pick up some chunks of art and drag them around as brushes, you do some perspective fills. All this needs is some color cycling and it’s hit all the cliches of “I just got Deluxe Paint”. And thanks for trying to turn this into a personal argument by dissing my own work. Very classy. I’d think someone swiping the name of a dead Expressionist would be all for my animation-influenced distortions or anatomy in the name of expressiveness, but whatever.
fractallyte 6y ago
It is a critique from someone who works in the field: http://egypt.urnash.com http://egypt.urnash.com
- egonschiele 6y ago
  It's an insult, not a critique.

This does not look substantially different from the stuff I was making when it was 1985 and I had a brand new copy of Deluxe Paint on my Amiga. Actually wait no I think I was actually trying to think about making something pleasant to look at instead of randomly spotting around the default colors with the airbrush. This is idle doodling, at best. Experiments with the tool being sold for a ludicrously high price, because she was in the gallery system and there were a bunch of rich idiots who might be willing to pay that. Looking around her site she does appear to have some actual skills at composition, palettes, and painting, but they are not on display here in the least.

egonschiele 6y ago
Interesting. I'd say picking the right colors, textures and shapes to make a group of people feel nostalgic about video games that don't exist, that takes real skill. It sounds like this art didn't do anything for you. But it did for others. This[1] didn't do anything for me either. But I sure as hell wouldn't be selfish enough to say it's not art. [1] http://egypt.urnash.com/rita/chapter/01/ http://egypt.urnash.com/rita/chapter/01/
- fractallyte 6y ago
  So, while individual pieces are fairly simplistic (and even amateurish, to a technical artist), taken as a whole they create a context and evoke a mood -> impressionism! Is that a way to understand it?
  - egonschiele 6y ago
    Yeah, that's one way to understand it (though I wouldn't call this impressionism). At the most human level, I'd say if someone connects with it, it's art. I did connect with these pieces so was bummed to see someone insulting them -- and an artist, no less. For example, I loved these: https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga47.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga47.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga36.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga36.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga46.html https://www.suzannetreister.net/Ampages/Amiga46.html But it's hard to say why ... and that's where I can start to ask why and start engaging with the work.
- egypturnash 6y ago
  Did I say this isn’t art? No. I said it looks like someone who just got a new tool fucking around with it, and that it looks much like what everyone who just got a copy of Deluxe Paint 2 tended to create. You make some patterns, you pick up some chunks of art and drag them around as brushes, you do some perspective fills. All this needs is some color cycling and it’s hit all the cliches of “I just got Deluxe Paint”. And thanks for trying to turn this into a personal argument by dissing my own work. Very classy. I’d think someone swiping the name of a dead Expressionist would be all for my animation-influenced distortions or anatomy in the name of expressiveness, but whatever.

fractallyte 6y ago

It is a critique from someone who works in the field: http://egypt.urnash.com http://egypt.urnash.com

egonschiele 6y ago
It's an insult, not a critique.